An excerpt from a film-analysis paper

This excerpt was taken from a student who took
the class last semester. The student was writing about the movie
Schindlers List (which is not one of your options). We have
provided this to you so that you get an idea of the depth of
analysis that we expect for an A paper.This is just an except that shows one of the concepts
(cognitive dissonance) that this student used. Remember that you
need to analyze the film using 3 concepts, and that you should
have a brief introduction and conclusion.

The attitude change that Oscar Schindler underwent is
dramatic. At the beginning of the film, he behaved in the
same way as other Nazi German officials and had no pity
for the Jews, but this attitude was completely reversed
at the end of the movie. Many factors might have led to
this gradual yet drastic attitude change, and I will
analyze the role of cognitive dissonance in causing this
change. Initially, Oscar Schindler recruited Jews to his
factory because he thought that the Jews provide him with
cheap labor. He appointed Isaac Stern to recruit
able-bodied Jews but Stern exploited his power and
started to recruit the weak and elderly Jews that would
have otherwise been sent to concentration camps.
Eventually, Schindler became aware that his factory was
nicknamed the safe haven for Jews.

I argue that this situation aroused cognitive
dissonancean aversive feeling that is aroused by
holding two or more inconsistent cognitions (Festinger,
1957; cited from Aronson, Wilson, Akert, 1998). According
to Festinger, people are motivated by a desire for
cognitive consistency and therefore, when discrepancy
arise, people are motivated to reduce it. For example, in
an experiment by Festinger and Carlsmity (1959; cited
from Aronson, Wilson, Akert, 1998), participants were
asked to lie to a confederate that the upcoming
experiment was extremely interesting. They were
paid either a small or large sum of money. Participants
who were paid a small sum of money experience cognitive
dissonance because the hold the inconsistent cognitions
of I just said that the experiment was
interesting and I really think the experiment
was boring. They did not have sufficient external
justification because they were only paid $1 for telling
the lie. To reduce the dissonance, they changed their
original attitude toward the experiment and subsequently
rated it as quite interesting. In contrast, participants
paid a large sum of money did not experience dissonance
because there was sufficient external justification ($20)
for engaging in the dishonest behavior. Therefore they
could add the new cognition It is OK to tell a
small lie for a lot of money to resolve the
dissonance.

Schindlers initial behavior of employing
young and able-bodied Jews did not lead to
cognitive dissonance because his cognitions Jews
are inferior and I employ Jews were
supplemented by a third cognition I am employing
Jews to maximize my own profit. The third cognition
provided sufficient external justification, similar to
what was experienced by participants in the $20 condition
of Festinger and Carlsmiths (1959) study. However,
when Schindler found out that Stern had recruited the
weak and the elderly into the factory to offer them
shelter and protection, dissonance arose because the
external justification of profit maximization no longer
applied. This dissonance was made especially prominent
when an one-armed elderly man went to Schindlers
office to thank Schindler for giving him a chance in the
factory. Schindler was enraged and reprimanded Stern for
his recruitment of handicapped and invalid
workers. In this situation, his
dissonant cognitions of my factory houses disabled
and weak Jews, and Jews are inferior
people were in direct confrontation. This
dissonance would cause an aversive state of arousal,
which could be a possible source of his anger.

When people are in a state of dissonance, the cognitive
dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957; cited from Aronson,
Wilson, Akert, 1998) suggests that people are motivated
to reduce the dissonance in three ways. They could change
their attitude discrepant behavior, change their original
cognitions, or add consonant cognitions. To reduce the
dissonance that he felt, Schindler thus could have fired
all the weak employees (change behavior), reduce his
prejudice toward Jews (change attitude), or find some
other way to justify why housing the unproductive Jews
could still be profitable (add consonant cognition).
After his encounter with the one-armed elderly man,
Schindler warned Stern that he should stop making the
factory into a safe haven, but yet he neither fired the
elderly man, nor made an effort to screen all his
employees for competence and fire the unproductive ones.
He might have initially tried to justify his behavior by
adding the consonant cognitions that these weaker members
of his workforce was still productive and profit making,
as demonstrated by his exchange with Nazi officers after
they have killed the one-arm elderly man, emphasizing
that this man was his essential skilled
worker. However, to claim that the disabled
and slow workers were essential was not a
strong external justification because Schindler was
probably aware that the productivity of these workers
could not have rivaled the younger and able-bodied
workers. With the weakened external justification,
Schindler ultimately resolved his dissonance by gradual
attitude change. Many scenes in the film showed how he
started to show more concern for the lives of the Jews.
For example, he was visibly emotionally disturbed when he
observed the emptying of the ghetto. Eventually, he
started to use his personal wealth, such as his gold
lighter and watch to buy lives of more Jews.
At this point, it was clear that he no longer justified
employing Jews as cheap labor to maximize his own profit
because he was intentionally engaging in behaviors that
would reduce his profit. The only motivation behind his
behavior was that his prejudiced attitudes were changed
and that he became genuinely concerned about the welfare
of the Jews.